I saw some op-eds weighing in on candidates for Colorado’s junior Senate seat.
Steve from Ft. Collins represents your typical hypocritical Republican Teabagger – deficits only matter when Democrats are in power:
How well have his [Sen. Bennet's] votes represented your children and grandchildren, who will be saddled with a lifelong debt due to the reckless spending of this runaway government?
Anyone want to bet that Steve sent in an op-ed when the Bush Regime blew the deficit up from $5 Trillion to $12 Trillion in 8 short years? How about when Reagen blew up the deficit? No, as usual, Steve is trying to use a topic to cover his true concern: a corporatist Democrat who isn’t 100% white is in the White House. If Steve took the deficit seriously, he would fully support both the health insurance legislation that passed this year and push to reduce the bloated war budget. Don’t take Steve seriously.
Scott from Loveland has a good point regarding health care solutions:
These bandages [high-deductible plans and open health savings accounts, espoused by Republican Teabagger Ken Buck] have been available for years and do not address the issue of those citizens who can afford neither.
That’s true. It’s like the Republican Teabagger complaint about tax cuts: would one of you please tell the rest of us where the millions of jobs created by the Bush tax cuts are hiding? The fewest jobs of any president post-WWII were created under Republican Teabagger economic policies. The rest of us are still trying to fix your damn mess. Your solution is ridiculous and has been proven to not work the way you think it works.
Martha from Denver speaks for a lot of progressives about Sen. Bennet:
He has finally come clean and admitted that he will be voting to continue the Bush tax cuts and against the Employee Free Choice Act. [...] He may earn a few Republican votes with his tactics, but when combined with the loss of thousands of votes from registered Democrats, he will lose this election. Be clear, he will lose because he stepped right of center.
Martha argues along the same lines that I have for years – Democrats need to stand for Democratic principles. Not bipartisan principles or Republican principles; Democratic principles. The number of issues which Sen. Bennet not only voted against his base’s wishes but cynically used micro-issues to raise cash and visibility from that base prior to those votes are long indeed. It surprises me that so many Democrats are still willing to support somebody who on too many occasions hasn’t supported them. Oh, when you vote for the lesser of two evils, you’re still voting for an evil. Don’t expect a ton of good to come from that.
Baxter from Silverthorne addresses my top issue:
If Ken Buck is like every other Republican in the U.S. Senate, he will fight all attempts to curb greenhouse gas emissions with a comprehensive energy and climate bill.
While true, some additional context should be made clear. Sen. Bennet early in 2009 voted to require that climate legislation be subjected to the 60-vote super-majority instead of the 50-vote majority requirement that wins most other contests. What followed was a lot of hand-wringing and lamenting that with the largest majority in the Senate in years, 60 votes just couldn’t be found, gosh darn it. No, it’s not as though Sen. Bennet found global warming to be a leading issue of the day. Let’s not kid ourselves and blindly think Sen. Bennet is a global warming champion. If anything, he found Senate procedure to be more important than any legislative topic. Sure, he started talking about “filibuster reform” after all Senate work had ground to a near-complete halt by mid-2010. It wasn’t like Republicans abused the rule throughout all of 2009 or anything. Heck, it wasn’t even like Republicans told Democrats they would do just that when the session started, right? And after being told this, Democratic Senators still continued to try to bring one, just one, Republican over on bill after bill after bill.
Leading up to voting this year, you should ask yourself this important question: will Sen. Bennet vote to change Senate rules on the first day of business in January, when rule changes only require 50 votes instead of 67 afterward? If Sen. Bennet wins this election and Democrats retain control of the Senate, will the filibuster rules be changed back to what they were historically, or will they continue to ask the Republican Teabaggers to steamroll over them, yet come back to the voters in 2012 and ask for more money, more volunteering, and more votes from us?